Herbicidal composition and method of use thereof

ABSTRACT

The present invention relates to method of controlling the growth of weeds, in particular barnyard grass, giant foxtail, large crabgrass, fall  panicum , goosegrass and/or woolly cupgrass, using a herbicidal composition comprising trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide. It also relates to the use of this composition, particularly on turfgrass.

The present invention relates to a herbicidal composition comprising trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide. The invention also relates to a method of controlling the growth of weeds and to the use of this composition, particularly on turfgrass.

The protection of crops from weeds and other vegetation that inhibit crop growth is a constantly recurring problem in agriculture and turf management. In addition, aesthetically, it may be of interest to remove such unwanted weeds and vegetation, for example, when growing turf in areas such as golf courses, lawns and public parks. To help combat these problems, researchers in the field of synthetic chemistry have produced an extensive variety of chemicals and chemical formulations effective in the control of such unwanted growth. Chemical herbicides of many types have been disclosed in the literature and a large number are in commercial use. Commercial herbicides and some that are still in development are described in ‘The Pesticide Manual’, 14^(th) Edition, published 2006 by the British Crop Protection Council.

In some cases, herbicidal active ingredients have been shown to be more effective in combination than when applied individually, and this is referred to as “synergism” since the combination demonstrates a potency or activity level exceeding that which it would be expected to have based on knowledge of the individual potencies of the components. The present invention resides in the discovery that HPPD inhibitors, and trinexapac-ethyl, already known for their herbicidal and plant growth regulation properties respectively, display a synergistic herbicidal effect when applied in combination.

The herbicidal compounds forming the composition of this invention are independently known in the art for their effects on plant growth. They are disclosed in ‘The Pesticide Manual’, ibid, and are also commercially available.

Trinexapac-ethyl is a plant growth regulator which reduces stem growth by inhibition of internode elongation. It is mainly taken up by the leaves and shoots. Trinexapac-ethyl (ethyl 4-(cyclopropylhydroxymethylene)-3,5-dioxocyclohexanecarboxylate) can be represented as:

Surprisingly, when HPPD inhibiting herbicides are applied in combination with trinexapac-ethyl, a synergistic herbicidal effect is observed. Accordingly, the present invention provides a herbicidal composition comprising a herbicidally effective amount of a mixture of trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide.

The composition contains a herbicidally effective amount of a combination of trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide. Suitably, the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is selected from the group consisting of mesotrione, sulcotrione, benoxfenap, isoxachlortole, isoxaflutole, pyrasulfotole, pyrazolynate, pyrazoxyfen, benzobicyclon, ketospiradox, tembotrione, topramezone, and a compound of formula I

In one embodiment, the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is mesotrione.

The term ‘herbicide’ as used herein denotes a compound which controls or modifies the growth of plants. The term ‘herbicidally effective amount’ indicates the quantity of such a compound or combination of such compounds which is capable of producing a controlling or modifying effect on the growth of plants. Controlling or modifying effects include all deviation from natural development, for example: killing, retardation, leaf burn, albinism, dwarfing and the like. For example, plants that are not killed are often stunted and non-competitive with flowering disrupted. The term ‘plants’ refers to all physical parts of a plant, including seeds, seedlings, saplings, roots, tubers, stems, stalks, foliage and fruits.

Suitable HPPD inhibitors for use in the present invention may be selected from the group consisting of triketones, isoxazoles, pyrazoles, benzobicyclon and ketospiradox. Further details of the individual compounds which fall within the triketones, isoxazoles and pyrazoles may be found in PCT Publication No. WO 2005/053407 (the disclosure of which is herein incorporated by reference) but there may be mentioned mesotrione, sulcotrione, isoxaflutole, isoxachlortole, benxofenap, pyrasulfotole, pyrazolynate and pyrazoxyfen. Further suitable HPPD inhibitors for use in the present invention include tembotrione, topramezone, and a compound of formula I

and all tautomeric forms thereof.

Mesotrione (2-(2′-nitro-4′-methylsulphonylbenzoyl)-1,3-cyclohexanedione) works by affecting carotenoid biosynthesis. In particular, it inhibits the enzyme 4-hydroxyphenyl-pyruvate dioxygenase (it is an HPPD-inhibitor). In the acid form, its structure can be represented as:

In addition to the acid form, mesotrione also forms salts and metal chelate, for example, a copper chelate. These metal chelates are disclosed, inter alia, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,912,207 (the disclosure of which is herein incorporated by reference) where they are shown to have unexpectedly superior stability in certain environments when compared to unchelated mesotrione.

Mesotrione is best known for its ability to control a wide spectrum of broadleaf weeds at a wide range of growth stages when applied post-emergence on corn and turfgrass. It is typically used at a low rate (100-225 grams of active ingredient per hectare depending on herbicide formulation on application timing) to control weeds which are present at application and which emerge for up to four weeks afterwards. Once applied, mesotrione is rapidly absorbed by the leaves, shoots, roots and seeds. In susceptible weeds, it disrupts carotenoid biosynthesis, an essential process for plant growth and this leads to plant death. Unlike weeds, corn plants and certain turfgrass species are able to tolerate mesotrione by rapidly breaking down the active compound into inactive compounds.

As used herein, the designation ‘mesotrione’ includes the salts and chelated forms of mesotrione as well as the acid form and also includes any enolic tautomeric forms that may give rise to geometric isomers. Furthermore, in certain cases, the various substituents and/or chelated forms may contribute to optical isomerism and/or stereoisomerism. All such tautomeric forms, racemic mixtures and isomers are included within the scope of the present invention.

In one embodiment of the invention, the mesotrione is present as the acid form. In a further embodiment, mesotrione is present as a salt or a metal chelate.

Suitable salts of mesotrione include salts of cations or anions which are known and accepted in the art for the formation of salts for agricultural or horticultural use. Such salts may be formed, for example, using amines, alkali metal bases, alkaline earth metal bases and quaternary ammonium bases.

Metal chelates of 2-(substituted benzoyl)-1,3-cyclohexanedione compounds including mesotrione are described, inter alia, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,912,207. In one embodiment, suitable metal chelates of mesotrione have the general structure:

wherein M represents a di- or trivalent metal ion.

Suitably, the di- or trivalent metal ion may be a Cu²⁺, Co²⁺, Zn²⁺, Ni²⁺, Ca²⁺, Al³⁺, Ti³⁺ or Fe³⁺ ion. More suitably, the metal ion may be a divalent transition metal ion such as Cu²⁺, Ni²⁺, Zn²⁺ and Co²⁺. More suitably the metal ion may be Cu²⁺ and Zn²⁺ and most suitably Cu²⁺.

Herbicidal metal chelates of mesotrione for use in this invention may be prepared by the methods described in the aforementioned US patent, or by the application and adaptation of known methods used or described in the chemical literature. In particular, any appropriate salt which would be a source of a di- or trivalent metal ion may be used to form the metal chelate of the dione compound in accordance with this invention. Particularly suitable salts include chlorides, sulphates, nitrates, carbonates, phosphates and acetates.

Suitably, the composition of the invention comprises trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide in a synergistically effective amount. In the compositions of this invention, the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl at which the herbicidal effect is synergistic lies within the range of from about 1:100 to about 1:100 by weight. Preferably, the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 2:1 to about 1:32 by weight. A mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl from about 1:1 to about 1:10 by weight is especially preferred.

The rate at which the composition of the invention is applied will depend upon the particular type of weed to be controlled, the degree of control required and the timing and method of application. In general, the compositions of the invention can be applied at an application rate of between 0.005 kilograms/hectare (kg/ha) and about 5.0 kg/ha, based on the total amount of active ingredient (HPPD inihibiting herbicide and trinexapac-ethyl) in the composition. An application rate of between about 0.1 kg/ha and about 3.0 kg/ha is preferred, with an application rate of between about 0.2 kg/ha and 1 kg/ha being especially preferred. It is noted that the rates used in the examples below are glasshouse rates and are lower than those normally applied in the field as herbicide effects tend to be magnified in such conditions.

The composition of the present invention may include more than one HPPD inhibiting herbicide, in mixture with trinexapac-ethyl.

In a further aspect, the present invention provides a method of controlling or modifying the growth of weeds comprising applying to the locus of such weeds a herbicidally effective amount of a composition of the invention.

The composition of the invention may be used to control a large number of agronomically important weeds, including monocotyledonous weeds and dicotyledonous weeds.

For example, the invention may be used to control dicotyledonous weeds such as Abutilon spp., Ambrosia spp., Amaranthus spp., Chenopodium spp., Erysimum spp., Euphorbia spp., Fallopia spp., Galium spp., Hydrocotyle spp., Ipomoea spp., Lamium spp., Medicago spp., Oxalis spp., Plantago spp., Polygonum spp., Richardia spp., Sida spp., Sinapis spp., Solanum spp., Stellaria spp., Taraxacum spp., Trifolium spp., Veronica spp., Viola spp. and Xanthium spp.

The invention may also be used to control monocotyledonous weeds such as Agrostis spp., Alopecurus spp., Apera spp., Avena spp., Brachiaria spp., Bromus spp., Digitaria spp., Echinochloa spp., Eleusine spp., Eriochloa spp., Leptochloa spp., Lolium spp., Ottochloa spp., Panicum spp., Paspalum spp., Phalaris spp., Poa spp., Rottboellia spp., Setaria spp., Sorghum spp., both intrinsically sensitive as well as resistant (e.g. ACCase and/or ALS resistant) biotypes of any of these grass weeds, as well as broadleaf monocotyledonous weeds such as Commelina spp., Monochoria spp., Sagittaria spp. and sedges such as Cyperus spp. and Scirpus spp.

More specifically, among the weeds which may be controlled by the composition of the invention, there may be mentioned monocotyledonous weeds such as grasses (e.g. barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli), large and smooth crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis, Digitaria ischaemum), goosegrass (Eleusine indica), bent grass (Agrostis spp.) and nimbleweed) and dicotyledonous weeds such as dandelion (Taraxacum spp.), white and red clover (Trifolium spp.), chickweed (Stellaria media), henbit (Lamium amplexicaule), corn speedwell (Veronica arvensis), oxalis (Oxalis spp.), buckhorn and broadleaf plantain (Plantago lanceolata, Plantago major), dollar weed (Hydrocotyle umbellata), FL pusley (Richardia scabra), lambsquarters (Chenopodium spp.), knotweed (Fallopia spp.), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), wild violets (Viola spp.), pigweed (Amaranthus spp.), black medic (Medicago lupulina), and hedge weed (Erysimum officinale).

Suitably, the compositions of the invention may be used to control monocotyledonous weeds, more suitably grasses. Suitably, the grass is barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galli), giant foxtail (Setaria faberi), large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis), fall panicum (Panicum dichotomiflorum), goosegrass (Eleusine indica), and/or woolly cupgrass (Eriochloa villosa).

For the purposes of the present invention, the term ‘weeds’ includes undesirable crop species such as volunteer crops. For example, in the context of turf grass crops such as on a golf course, creeping bentgrass putting green turf can be considered a ‘volunteer’ if found in a fairway section where a different variety of grass is being cultivated. The other grasses listed below can, similarly, be considered weeds when found in the wrong place.

The ‘locus’ is intended to include soil, seeds, and seedlings as well as established vegetation.

The benefits of the present invention are seen most when the pesticidal composition is applied to kill weeds in growing crops of useful plants: such as maize (corn) including field corn, pop corn and sweet corn; cotton, wheat, rice, oats, potato sugarbeet, plantation crops (such as bananas, fruit trees, rubber trees, tree nurseries), vines, asparagus, bushberries (such as blueberries), caneberries, cranberries, flax, grain sorghum, okra, peppermint, rhubarb, spearmint and sugarcane.

‘Crops’ are understood to also include various turf grasses including, but not limited to, the cool-season turf grasses and the warm-season turf grasses. In one embodiment of the present invention, the crop is turfgrass.

Cool season turfgrasses include, for example, bluegrasses (Poa L.), such as Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.), rough bluegrass (Poa trivialis L.), Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa L.) and annual bluegrass (Poa annua L.); bentgrasses (Agrostis L.), such as creeping bentgrass (Agrostis palustris Huds.), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenius Sibth.), velvet bentgrass (Agrostis canina L.) and redtop (Agrostis alba L.); fescues (Festuca L.), such as tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.), meadow fescue (Festuca elatior L.) and fine fescues such as creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra L.), chewings fescue (Festuca rubra var. commutata Gaud.), sheep fescue (Festuca ovina L.) and hard fescue (Festuca longifolia); and ryegrasses (Lolium L.), such as perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) and annual (Italian) ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.).

Warm season turfgrasses include, for example, Bermudagrasses (Cynodon L C. Rich), including hybrid and common Bermudagrass; Zoysiagrasses (Zoysia Willd.), St. Augustinegrass (Stenotaphrum secundatum (Walt.) Kuntze); and centipedegrass (Eremochloa ophiuroides (Munro.) Hack.).

In addition ‘crops’ are to be understood to include those crops that have been made tolerant to pests and pesticides, including herbicides or classes of herbicides (and, suitably, the herbicides of the present invention), as a result of conventional methods of breeding or genetic engineering. Tolerance to herbicides means a reduced susceptibility to damage caused by a particular herbicide compared to conventional crop breeds. Crops can be modified or bred so as to be tolerant, for example, to HPPD inhibitors such as mesotrione, EPSPS inhibitors such as glyphosate or to glufosinate. It is noted that corn is naturally tolerant to mesotrione.

The composition of the present invention is useful in controlling the growth of undesirable vegetation by pre-emergence or post-emergence application to the locus where control is desired, depending on the crop over which the combination is applied. In one embodiment, therefore, the herbicidal composition of the invention is applied as a pre-emergent application. In a further embodiment, the herbicidal composition of the invention is applied as a post-emergent application.

The compounds of the invention may be applied either simultaneously or sequentially. If administered sequentially, the components may be administered in any order in a suitable timescale, for example, with no longer than 24 hours between the time of administering the first component and the time of administering the last component. Suitably, all the components are administered within a timescale of a few hours, such as one hour. If the components are administered simultaneously, they may be administered separately or as a tank mix or as a pre-formulated mixture of all the components or as a pre-formulated mixture of some of the components tank mixed with the remaining components. In one embodiment the mixture or composition of the present invention may be applied to a crop as a seed treatment prior to planting.

In practice, the compositions of the invention are applied as a formulation containing the various adjuvants and carriers known to or used in the industry. The compositions of the invention may thus be formulated as granules (and, suitably, as stabilised granules, as described below), as wettable powders, as emulsifiable concentrates, as powders or dusts, as flowables, as solutions, as suspensions or emulsions, or as controlled release forms such as microcapsules. These formulations may contain as little as about 0.5% to as much as about 95% or more by weight of active ingredient. The optimum amount for any given compound will depend on formulation, application equipment and nature of the plants to be controlled.

Wettable powders are in the form of finely divided particles which disperse readily in water or other liquid carriers. The particles contain the active ingredient retained in a solid matrix. Typical solid matrices include fuller's earth, kaolin clays, silicas and other readily wet organic or inorganic solids. Wettable powders normally contain about 5% to about 95% of the active ingredient plus a small amount of wetting, dispersing or emulsifying agent.

Emulsifiable concentrates are homogeneous liquid compositions dispersible in water or other liquid and may consist entirely of the active compound with a liquid or solid emulsifying agent, or may also contain a liquid carrier, such as xylene, heavy aromatic naphthas, isophorone and other non-volatile organic solvents. In use, these concentrates are dispersed in water or other liquid and normally applied as a spray to the area to be treated. The amount of active ingredient may range from about 0.5% to about 95% of the concentrate.

Granular formulations include both extrudates and relatively coarse particles and are usually applied without dilution to the area in which suppression of vegetation is desired. Typical carriers for granular formulations include fertiliser, sand, fullers earth, attapulgite clay, bentonite clays, montmorillonite clay, vermiculite, perlite, calcium carbonate, brick, pumice, pyrophyllite, kaolin, dolomite, plaster, wood flour, ground corn cobs, ground peanut hulls, sugars, sodium chloride, sodium sulphate, sodium silicate, sodium borate, magnesia, mica, iron oxide, zinc oxide, titanium oxide, antimony oxide, cryolite, gypsum, diatomaceous earth, calcium sulphate and other organic or inorganic materials which absorb or which can be coated with the active compound. Particularly suitable is a fertiliser granule carrier. Granular formulations normally contain about 5% to about 25% active ingredients which may include surface-active agents such as heavy aromatic naphthas, kerosene and other petroleum fractions, or vegetable oils; and/or stickers such as dextrins, glue or synthetic resins. Suitably, the granular formulation may be a stabilised composition which comprises at least one granular substrate material containing trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inhibiting herbicide. The granular substrate material can be one of the typical carriers mentioned above and/or can be a fertiliser material e.g. urea/formaldehyde fertilisers, urea, potassium chloride, ammonium compounds, phosphorus compounds, sulphur, similar plant nutrients and micronutrients and mixtures or combinations thereof. The HPPD inhibiting herbicide and the trinexapac-ethyl may be homogeneously distributed throughout the granule or may be spray impregnated or absorbed onto the granule substrate after the granules are formed.

Dusts are free-flowing admixtures of the active ingredient with finely divided solids such as talc, clays, flours and other organic and inorganic solids which act as dispersants and carriers.

Microcapsules are typically droplets or granules of the active material enclosed in an inert porous shell which allows escape of the enclosed material to the surroundings at controlled rates. Encapsulated droplets are typically about 1 to 50 microns in diameter. The enclosed liquid typically constitutes about 50 to 95% of the weight of the capsule and may include solvent in addition to the active compound. Encapsulated granules are generally porous granules with porous membranes sealing the granule pore openings, retaining the active species in liquid form inside the granule pores. Granules typically range from 1 millimetre to 1 centimetre, preferably 1 to 2 millimetres in diameter. Granules are formed by extrusion, agglomeration or prilling, or are naturally occurring. Examples of such materials are vermiculite, sintered clay, kaolin, attapulgite clay, sawdust and granular carbon. Shell o membrane materials include natural and synthetic rubbers, cellulosic materials, styrene-butadiene copolymers, polyacrylonitriles, polyacrylates, polyesters, polyamides, polyureas, polyurethanes and starch xanthates.

Other useful formulations for herbicidal applications include simple solutions of the active ingredients in a solvent in which it is completely soluble at the desired concentration, such as acetone, alkylated naphthalenes, xylene and other organic solvents. Pressurised sprayers, wherein the active ingredient is dispersed in finely-divided form as a result of vaporisation of a low boiling dispersant solvent carrier, may also be used.

Many of the formulations described above include wetting, dispersing or emulsifying agents. Examples are alkyl and alkylaryl sulphonates and sulphates and their salts, polyhydric alcohols; polyethoxylated alcohols, esters and fatty amines. These agents, when used, normally comprise from 0.1% to 15% by weight of the formulation.

Suitable agricultural adjuvants and carriers that are useful in formulating the compositions of the invention in the formulation types described above are well known to those skilled in the art. Suitable examples of the different classes are found in the non-limiting list below.

Liquid carriers that can be employed include water, toluene, xylene, petroleum naphtha, crop oil, acetone, methyl ethyl ketone, cyclohexanone, acetic anhydride, acetonitrile, acetophenone, amyl acetate, 2-butanone, chlorobenzene, cyclohexane, cyclohexanol, alkyl acetates, diacetonalcohol, 1,2-dichloropropane, diethanolamine, p-diethylbenzene, diethylene glycol, diethylene glycol abietate, diethylene glycol butyl ether, diethylene glycol ethyl ether, diethylene glycol methyl ether, N,N-dimethyl formamide, dimethyl sulfoxide, 1,4-dioxane, dipropylene glycol, dipropylene glycol methyl ether, dipropylene glycol dibenzoate, diproxitol, alkyl pyrrolidinone, ethyl acetate, 2-ethyl hexanol, ethylene carbonate, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 2-heptanone, alpha pinene, d-limonene, ethylene glycol, ethylene glycol butyl ether, ethylene glycol methyl ether, gamma-butyrolactone, glycerol, glycerol diacetate, glycerol monoacetate, glycerol triacetate, hexadecane, hexylene glycol, isoamyl acetate, isobornyl acetate, isooctane, isophorone, isopropyl benzene, isopropyl myristate, lactic acid, laurylamine, mesityl oxide, methoxy-propanol, methyl isoamyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, methyl laurate, methyl octanoate, methyl oleate, methylene chloride, m-xylene, n-hexane, n-octylamine, octadecanoic acid, octyl amine acetate, oleic acid, oleylamine, o-xylene, phenol, polyethylene glycol (PEG400), propionic acid, propylene glycol, propylene glycol monomethyl ether, p-xylene, toluene, triethyl phosphate, triethylene glycol, xylene sulfonic acid, paraffin, mineral oil, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, ethyl acetate, amyl acetate, butyl acetate, methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, and higher molecular weight alcohols such as amyl alcohol, tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol, hexanol, octanol, etc. ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, glycerine, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone, and the like. Water is generally the carrier of choice for the dilution of concentrates.

Suitable solid carriers include talc, titanium dioxide, pyrophyllite clay, silica, attapulgite clay, kieselguhr, chalk, diatomaxeous earth, lime, calcium carbonate, bentonite clay, fuller's earth, fertiliser, cotton seed hulls, wheat flour, soybean flour, pumice, wood flour, walnut shell flour, lignin and the like.

A broad range of surface-active agents are advantageously employed in both said liquid and solid compositions, especially those designed to be diluted with carrier before application. The surface-active agents can be anionic, cationic, non-ionic or polymeric in character and can be employed as emulsifying agents, wetting agents, suspending agents or for other purposes. Typical surface active agents include salts of alkyl sulfates, such as diethanolammonium lauryl sulphate; alkylarylsulfonate salts, such as calcium dodecylbenzenesulfonate; alkylphenol-alkylene oxide addition products, such as nonylphenol-C.sub. 18 ethoxylate; alcohol-alkylene oxide addition products, such as tridecyl alcohol-C.sub. 16 ethoxylate; soaps, such as sodium stearate; alkylnaphthalenesulfonate salts, such as sodium dibutylnaphthalenesulfonate; dialkyl esters of sulfosuccinate salts, such as sodium di(2-ethylhexyl)sulfosuccinate; sorbitol esters, such as sorbitol oleate; quaternary amines, such as lauryl trimethylammonium chloride; polyethylene glycol esters of fatty acids, such as polyethylene glycol stearate; block copolymers of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide; and salts of mono and dialkyl phosphate esters.

Other adjuvants commonly utilized in agricultural compositions include crystallisation inhibitors, viscosity modifiers, suspending agents, spray droplet modifiers, pigments, antioxidants, foaming agents, light-blocking agents, compatibilizing agents, antifoam agents, sequestering agents, neutralising agents and buffers, corrosion inhibitors, dyes, odorants, spreading agents, penetration aids, micronutrients, emollients, lubricants, sticking agents, and the like. The compositions can also be formulated with liquid fertilizers or solid, particulate fertiliser carriers such as ammonium nitrate, urea and the like.

An important factor in influencing the usefulness of a given herbicide is its selectivity towards crops. In some cases, a beneficial crop is susceptible to the effects of the herbicide. To be effective, an herbicide must cause minimal damage (preferably no damage) to the beneficial crop while maximizing damage to weed species which infest the locus of the crop. To preserve the beneficial aspects of herbicide use and to minimize crop damage, it is known to apply herbicides in combination with an antidote if necessary. As used here in ‘antidote’ describes a compound which has the effect of establishing herbicide selectivity, i.e. continued herbicidal phytotoxicity to weed species by the herbicide and reduced or non-phytotoxicity to the cultivated crop species. The term ‘antidotally effective amount’ describes an amount of an antidote compound which counteracts to some degree a phytotoxic response of a beneficial crop to an herbicide. If necessary or desired for a particular application or crop, the composition of the present invention may contain an antidotally effective amount of an antidote for the herbicides of the invention. Those skilled in the art will be familiar with antidotes which are suitable for use with HPPD inihibiting herbicides and trinexapac-ethyl and can readily determine an antidotally effective amount for a particular compound and application. The antidote may include, for example, benoxacor, fenclorim, cloquintocet-mexyl, mefenpyr-diethyl, furilazole, dicyclonon, fluxofenim, dichlormid, flurazole, isoxadifen-ethyl, fenchlorazole-ethyl, primisulfuron-methyl, cyprosulfamide, the compound of formula II

the compound of formula III

to the compound of formula IV

the compound of formula V

the compound of formula VI

or the compound of formula VII

In addition, further, other biocidally active ingredients or compositions may be combined with the herbicidal composition of this invention. For example, the compositions may contain, in addition to trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inihibiting herbicide, other herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, bactericides, acaracides, nematicides and/or plant growth regulators, in order to broaden the spectrum of activity.

Each of the above formulations can be prepared as a package containing the herbicides together with other ingredients of the formulation (diluents, emulsifiers, surfactants, etc.). The formulations can also be prepared by a tank mix method, in which the ingredients are obtained separately and combined at the grower site.

These formulations can be applied to the areas where control is desired by conventional methods. Dust and liquid compositions, for example, can be applied by the use of power-dusters, broom and hand sprayers and spray dusters. The formulations can also be applied from airplanes as a dust or a spray or by rope wick applications. To modify or control growth of germinating seeds or emerging seedlings, dust and liquid formulations can be distributed in the soil to a depth of at least one-half inch below the soil surface or applied to the soil surface only, by spraying or sprinkling. The formulations can also be applied by addition to irrigation water. This permits penetration of the formulations into the soil together with the irrigation water. Dust compositions, granular compositions or liquid formulations applied to the surface of the soil can be distributed below the surface of the soil by conventional means such as discing, dragging or mixing operations.

The present invention can be used in any situation in which weed control is desired, for example in agriculture, on golf courses, or in gardens. The present invention is particularly suitable for the selective control of weeds such as barnyard grass in turfgrass. Mixtures of HPPD inihibiting herbicide (in particular mesotrione) and trinexapac-ethyl coated on or impregnated in a fertiliser granule are particularly useful.

The following examples are for illustrative purposes only. The examples are not intended as necessarily representative of the overall testing performed and are not intended to limit the invention in any way. As one skilled in the art is aware, in herbicidal testing, a significant number of factors that are not readily controllable can affect the results of individual tests and render them non-reproducible. For example, the results may vary depending on environmental factors, such as amount of sunlight and water, soil type, pH of the soil, temperature and humidity, among others. Also, the depth of planting, the application rate of individual and combined herbicides, the application rate of any antidote, and the ratio of the individual herbicides to one another and/or to an antidote as well as the nature of crops or weeds being tested can affect the results of the test. Results may vary from crop to crop within the crop varieties.

EXAMPLES

In the following tests, herbicides were applied at reduced field rates because herbicide effects are magnified in a glasshouse environment. The rates tested were selected to give between about 50 and 70% control with herbicides applied alone, so that any synergistic effect could be readily detected when testing mixtures.

Example 1 Control of Barnyard Grass with Mesotrione and Trinexapac-Ethyl Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out. Barnyard grass seeds were sown into standard glasshouse potting mix (1:1 v/v Promix:Vero sand soil) contained in 10 cm square plastic pots. Treatments were replicated three times. Mesotrione (in the form Callisto® 480SE) was applied post-emergence to barnyard grass (Echinochloa crus-galla) at either 12.5 g ai/ha or 24 g ai/ha with or without trinexapac-ethyl (in the form of Palisade®). When used, trinexapac-ethyl was applied at a rate of 200 g ai/ha or 400 g ai/ha. The adjuvant system was X-77 at 0.1% v/v in deionised water. 200 litres of herbicide/adjuvant system was used per hectare. General weed control was evaluated at 7 and 14 days after treatment (DAT). It is noted that all herbicides were applied at reduced field rates because herbicide effects are magnified in a glasshouse environment. Rates were chosen to give a 50 to 70% level of control with herbicides applied alone as this allows for detection of any synergistic effect when tank mixtures are used.

Table 1 shows the results, as evaluated using the Colby formula. The expected result for (A+B) is (A+B)−(A×B/100) where A and B are the ‘observed’ results for A and B on their own. Control from the tank mixture is synergistic if the actual result is significantly higher than the expected result (significance based on Student-Newman-Keuls multiple range test).

TABLE 1 Plus Mesotrione Plus Mesotrione Rate at 12.5 g ai/ha at 24 g ai/ha Herbicide (g ai/ha) Actual Expected Actual Expected Trinexapacethyl 200 38* 7 40* 25 Trinexapacethyl 400 47* 25 57* 40 *synergy

Using the Colby formula and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple range test, synergy was seen at both the high and low rates of mesotrione and the low and high rates of trinexapac-ethyl when a combination of trinexapac-ethyl and mesotrione was used to control barnyard grass.

Example 2 Control of Giant Foxtail with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Setaria faberi (giant foxtail). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2 MST at MST at MST at MST at Rate 25 g ai/ha 50 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 200 35.0* 32.5 32.5 32.5 35.0* 32.5 46.3* 32.5 TXP 400 36.3 45.0 45.0 54.0 48.8* 45.0 55.0* 45.0 TXP 800 51.3* 43.8 43.8 43.8 53.8* 43.8 58.8* 43.8 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy

Synergy in control of giant foxtail was seen at many of the rate combinations tested, but especially for high rates of mesotrione in combination with all rates of trinexapac-ethyl tested.

Example 3 Control of Large Crabgrass with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Digitaria sanguinalis (large crabgrass). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 3 below.

TABLE 3 MST at MST at MST at MST at Rate 25 g ai/ha 50 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 200 52.5* 24.9 73.8* 44.5 77.0* 55.0 87.5* 68.4 TXP 400 45.0* 30.0 60.0* 48.3 75.8* 58.0 93.3* 70.5 TXP 800 60.0* 47.2 72.5* 61.0 81.3* 68.3 91.3* 77.8 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy

Synergy in control of large crabgrass was seen at all rate combinations tested.

Example 4 Control of Fall Panicum with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Panicum dichotomiflorum (fall panicum). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 4 below.

TABLE 4 MST at MST at MST at MST at Rate 25 g ai/ha 50 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 200 27.5 36.5 23.8 38.2 36.3 41.6 58.8* 53.6 TXP 400 38.8* 32.9 40.0* 34.8 47.5* 38.4 62.5* 51.1 TXP 800 43.8* 36.5 37.5 38.2 46.3* 41.6 68.8* 53.6 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy

Synergy in control of fall panicum was seen at many of the rate combinations tested, but especially for high rates of mesotrione in combination with all rates of trinexapac-ethyl tested.

Example 5 Control of Goosegrass with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Eleusine indica (goosegrass). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 5 below.

TABLE 5 MST at MST at MST at MST at Rate 25 g ai/ha 50 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 200 53.8* 39.7 62.5* 44.9 71.3* 44.9 83.8* 47.5 TXP 400 57.5* 50.4 64.5* 54.7 76.3* 54.7 85.0* 56.9 TXP 800 60.0* 56.9 65.0* 60.7 73.8* 60.7 90.0* 62.5 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy

Synergy in control of goosegrass was seen at all rate combinations tested.

Example 6 Control of Black Medic with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Medicago lupulina (black medic). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 6 below.

TABLE 6 MST at MST at MST at MST at 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha Rate (8 DAA) (8 DAA) (27 DAA) (27 DAA) (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 100 53* 24 53* 41 73 88 95* 87 TXP 200 NT NT 60* 37 NT NT 97* 86 TXP 400 53* 18 57* 37 85 88 93* 83 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy, DAA = days after application; NT = not tested

Synergy in control of black medic was seen at most of the rate combinations tested.

Example 7 Control of White Clover with Mesotrione (MST) and Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1, substituting barnyard grass for Trifolium repens (white clover). The rates used, and results obtained, are indicated in Table 7 below.

TABLE 7 MST at MST at MST at MST at 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha 100 g ai/ha 200 g ai/ha Rate (8 DAA) (8 DAA) (27 DAA) (27 DAA) (g ai/ha) A E A E A E A E TXP 100 53* 42 50* 41 85 90 97* 84 TXP 200 NT NT 69* 37 NT NT 85  83 TXP 400 43  42 60* 37 78 90 93* 83 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy; NT = not tested

Synergy in control of white clover was seen at most of the rate combinations tested.

Example 8 Control of Goosegrass, Giant Foxtail and Woolly Cupgrass with Various Herbicides And Trinexapac-Ethyl (TXP) Applied Post-Emergence

A glasshouse trial was carried out as described in Example 1 to test various herbicides (each at 2 different rates) in combination with trinexapac-ethyl (at 2 different rates), against goosegrass (Eleusine indica, ELEIN), giant foxtail (Setaria faberi, SETFA) and woolly cupgrass (Eriochloa villosa, ERBVI). Treatments were made late post-emergence. Where possible, the compounds were tested in the form of commercial formulations (Callisto® 4SC for mesotrione; a developmental 250EC formulation for formula I; Balance Pro® for isoxaflutole; a 25WP formulation for tembotrione; Impact® 4.8SC for topramezone; PrimoMAXX® 120ME for trinexapac-ethyl). Percentage weed control was assessed at 13 and 21 days after application.

The results for the 13 DAA assessment are shown in Table 8. The same pattern of synergy was observed at 21 DAA.

TABLE 8 Rate ELEIN SETFA ERBVI Treatment (g ai/ha) A E A E A E Mesotrione 100 60* 28 45* 27 50* 39 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Mesotrione 200 53* 37 57* 32 60* 50 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Formula (I) 25 60* 28 45* 27 50* 39 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Formula (I) 50 73  80 83* 74 73* 69 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Isoxaflutole 25 32  47 83* 70 82* 63 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Isoxaflutole 50 63* 51 96* 79 85* 61 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Tembotrione 100 48* 39 37  39 72* 53 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Tembotrione 200 53* 39 48* 40 65  64 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Topramezone 25 85  88 98* 89 91* 77 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Topramezone 50 88  88 100  98 97* 86 Trinexapac-ethyl 200 Mesotrione 100 53* 32 50* 36 52* 46 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Mesotrione 200 68* 41 68* 41 57* 56 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Formula (I) 25 70* 54 78* 62 68  65 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Formula (I) 50 78  81 89* 77 76  73 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Isoxaflutole 25 43  49 92* 73 73* 67 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Isoxaflutole 50 84* 54 97* 81 87* 66 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Tembotrione 100 57* 42 46  46 70* 58 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Tembotrione 200 55* 42 55* 48 74* 68 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Topramezone 25 84  88 98* 91 79  80 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 Topramezone 50 95* 88 99  98 93* 87 Trinexapac-ethyl 400 A = actual weed control value; E = expected weed control value (calculated using the Colby formula); * = synergy

The results show that synergy was widely observed when co-applying trinexapac-ethyl and HPPD inhibiting herbicides at various rates to all 3 grass weed species.

Although the invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments and examples thereof, the scope of the present invention is not limited only to those described embodiments. As will be apparent to persons skilled in the art, modifications and adaptations to the above-described invention can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, which is defined and circumscribed by the appended claims. All publications cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes to the same extent as if each individual publication were specifically and individually indicated to be so incorporated by reference. 

1. A method for controlling or modifying the growth of weeds, comprising applying to the locus of the weeds a herbicidally effective amount of a composition comprising a mixture of trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inihibiting herbicide.
 2. A method according to claim 1, wherein the weeds are grasses.
 3. A method according to claim 2, wherein the weeds are selected from the group consisting of barnyard grass, giant foxtail, large crabgrass, fall panicum, goosegrass and woolly cupgrass.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the weeds are present in turfgrass.
 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the composition is applied (i) pre-emergence or (ii) post-emergence.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the combined amount of HPPD inihibiting herbicide and trinexapac-ethyl applied to the locus of the weeds is between about 0.005 kg/ha and about 5 kg/ha.
 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the combined amount of HPPD inihibiting herbicide and trinexapac-ethyl applied to the locus of the weeds is between about 0.1 kg/ha and about 3 kg/ha.
 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the combined amount of HPPD inihibiting herbicide and trinexapac-ethyl applied to the locus of the weeds is between about 0.2 kg/ha and about 1 kg/ha.
 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is selected from the group consisting of mesotrione, sulcotrione, benoxfenap, isoxachlortole, isoxaflutole, pyrasulfotole, pyrazolynate, pyrazoxyfen, benzobicyclon, ketospiradox, tembotrione, topramezone, and a compound of formula I


10. The method of claim 9, wherein the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is mesotrione.
 11. The method of claim 10, wherein mesotrione comprises a metal chelate of mesotrione.
 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the metal chelate of mesotrione comprises the copper chelate of mesotrione.
 13. The method of claim 1, wherein the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 100:1 to about 1:100 by weight.
 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 2:1 to about 1:32 by weight.
 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 1:1 to about 1:10 by weight.
 16. The method of claim 1, wherein the mixture is impregnated in, absorbed onto, or coated on a fertiliser granule.
 17. A herbicidal composition comprising a herbicidally effective amount of a mixture of trinexapac-ethyl and at least one HPPD inihibiting herbicide.
 18. The composition of claim 17, wherein the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is selected from the group consisting of mesotrione, sulcotrione, benoxfenap, isoxachlortole, isoxaflutole, pyrasulfotole, pyrazolynate, pyrazoxyfen, benzobicyclon, ketospiradox, tembotrione, topramezone, and a compound of formula I


19. The composition of claim 18, wherein the HPPD inhibiting herbicide is mesotrione.
 20. The composition of claim 19, wherein mesotrione comprises a metal chelate form of mesotrione.
 21. The composition of claim 20, wherein the metal chelate of mesotrione comprises the copper chelate of mesotrione.
 22. The composition of claim 17, wherein the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 100:1 to about 1:100 by weight.
 23. The composition of claim 22, wherein the mixture ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 2:1 to about 1:32 by weight.
 24. The composition of claim 23, wherein the ratio of HPPD inihibiting herbicide to trinexapac-ethyl is from about 1:1 to about 1:10 by weight.
 25. The composition of claim 17, wherein the mixture is impregnated in, absorbed onto, or coated on a fertiliser granule.
 26. (canceled)
 27. (canceled)
 28. (canceled) 